PokerStars can claim that it has "the best online poker rewards program," but that's not true for most poker players.
PokerStars tiresome advertising on the Two Plus Two Pokercast is misleading because most players would rather have 27 percent of their rake deposited into their Full Tilt accounts every Friday, and most players don't play enough on a single site to rack up the 100,000 annual points needed to get the best benefits on PokerStars.
Yes, those players who do reach Supernova level on PokerStars are rewarded with bonuses, tournament entries and prizes that exceed the value of regular old rakeback. But for players like me who choose to spread their play around several sites, there's nothing better than cash in my account as a reward that's directly proportional to the amount of rake I contribute.
By comparison, Stars' reward program gives the best value to its hard-core players while shortchanging those who don't play as much. A 2+2 thread discusses this discrepancy in-depth.
The result is that I almost never play at Stars. I like Stars and I would give them more of my business, but there's simply no incentive for me to log on. I have about 1,500 points accumulated so far this year, an amount that earns me next to nothing. I guess I could splurge on a deck of cards.
I sympathize with those who don't receive rakeback on Full Tilt, but I can't understand why you would play on PokerStars regularly unless you're a high-volume player who dedicates most of your play on a single site.
UPDATE: The Two Plus Two Internet Magazine evaluates PokerStars' VIP program in the November issue.
Showing posts with label bankroll. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bankroll. Show all posts
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Failed Experiment
If I can fight and win hard-earned money playing three 5/10 tables, could I make almost as much with fewer swings playing nine softer 1/2 tables?
I tiled the nine 1/2 tables on my 24-inch monitor to find out last night.
Unfortunately, these 1/2 players kicked my ass! I lost at a faster rate than I can ever remember, dropping 10 buy-ins in just two hours. How can this be possible? I thought these games were supposed to be easier?
There's an simple answer: massive multitabling reduces my winrate so drastically that I become a huge fish. I can't read hands well when I have to make quick decisions at several tables at a time. I can't tell the difference between my opponents' bluffs and value bets when I haven't been watching them. I hit the call button way too often when there's no reasonable hand that could beat my overpair, only to be shown some kind of unreasonable junk hand that I paid off in full.
There were some atrocious bad beats mixed in there as well: set over set, rivered flush vs. my set, AK beats my AA, etc. But there's no doubt that I played extremely poorly as well, getting all in several times with hands like pocket 99 and JJ on the flop, which is rarely a good move without a solid read.
This nine-tabling experiment wasn't a wasted effort though. I learned a lot:
_ I can't handle too many tables. It turns me into a losing player. I'm sure some people can do it, but I'm not a fast enough decision maker to effectively play more than three tables, or four at the most.
_ The old saying that you revert to your novice game when playing poorly proves true once again. I found myself overplaying strong preflop hands and paying off lightly when I knew I was beaten but couldn't put my opponents on a hand.
_ Just because my opponents make -EV preflop plays doesn't always mean I should justify their actions postflop by gifting them my stack. Loose calls of preflop 3-bets with low pocket pairs and suited connectors are usually unprofitable plays in the long run, but that doesn't mean I have to call them.
_ I've wondered at times if 100 BB stacks are deep enough to fight off the pushmonkeys. I now believe they are. There's still plenty of room to maneuver with 100 BB stacks, and stacking off with top pair is usually poor poker for that many bets. I estimate that top pair is worth no more than 50 BB in most situations.
This is kind of obvious stuff. I guess I have to learn the hard way. Good thing it's only two buy-ins at 5/10, but losing so much at a lower limit tilted the hell out of me.
I tiled the nine 1/2 tables on my 24-inch monitor to find out last night.
Unfortunately, these 1/2 players kicked my ass! I lost at a faster rate than I can ever remember, dropping 10 buy-ins in just two hours. How can this be possible? I thought these games were supposed to be easier?
There's an simple answer: massive multitabling reduces my winrate so drastically that I become a huge fish. I can't read hands well when I have to make quick decisions at several tables at a time. I can't tell the difference between my opponents' bluffs and value bets when I haven't been watching them. I hit the call button way too often when there's no reasonable hand that could beat my overpair, only to be shown some kind of unreasonable junk hand that I paid off in full.
There were some atrocious bad beats mixed in there as well: set over set, rivered flush vs. my set, AK beats my AA, etc. But there's no doubt that I played extremely poorly as well, getting all in several times with hands like pocket 99 and JJ on the flop, which is rarely a good move without a solid read.
This nine-tabling experiment wasn't a wasted effort though. I learned a lot:
_ I can't handle too many tables. It turns me into a losing player. I'm sure some people can do it, but I'm not a fast enough decision maker to effectively play more than three tables, or four at the most.
_ The old saying that you revert to your novice game when playing poorly proves true once again. I found myself overplaying strong preflop hands and paying off lightly when I knew I was beaten but couldn't put my opponents on a hand.
_ Just because my opponents make -EV preflop plays doesn't always mean I should justify their actions postflop by gifting them my stack. Loose calls of preflop 3-bets with low pocket pairs and suited connectors are usually unprofitable plays in the long run, but that doesn't mean I have to call them.
_ I've wondered at times if 100 BB stacks are deep enough to fight off the pushmonkeys. I now believe they are. There's still plenty of room to maneuver with 100 BB stacks, and stacking off with top pair is usually poor poker for that many bets. I estimate that top pair is worth no more than 50 BB in most situations.
This is kind of obvious stuff. I guess I have to learn the hard way. Good thing it's only two buy-ins at 5/10, but losing so much at a lower limit tilted the hell out of me.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Beware! Full Tilt Fraud Attempt
Someone tried to scam me by spoofing Full Tilt's e-mail address and asking me to download a "Full Tilt Security Update."
This e-mail was a fraud, confirmed by the real Full Tilt support staff. Fortunately, I didn't fall for it, but I bet some people will.
Here is Full Tilt's response:
This e-mail was a fraud, confirmed by the real Full Tilt support staff. Fortunately, I didn't fall for it, but I bet some people will.
Here is Full Tilt's response:
And here is a copy of the original hoax e-mail. It looked suspicious but could fool someone who wasn't on-guard:
Hello XXXXX,
Thank you for contacting Full Tilt Poker Security.
The email you received is not from Full Tilt Poker as it has been
determined that it is a hoax.
It appears that they spoofed our email address
"support@fulltiltpoker.com" in an attempt to obtain your account
information.
Please note that we will never ask for your password or ask you to
download a third party links. Any updates for Full Tilt Poker will be
done directly from the game client.
We are pleased that you have not downloaded the link in question as this
may have caused serious computer and account problems.
At this time we request that you change your password.
Once your password is changed, your account will be properly protected
and you should not have any further issues regarding this.
_____
For future reference, there are several ways to protect yourself and
keep your account secure:
1) Never share your password with anyone, not even family or friends.
Treat your password like your bank card PIN, and keep it top secret.
2) Use a complex password. Ideally your password should include at least
8 alphanumeric symbols. For example, "po_k3R-One" is a stronger password
than "poker1".
3) If you decide to use the "Remember Password" feature, be cautious
when allowing others to access your computer. Family and friends may log
in and play without realizing your account contains real money.
4) Regularly scan your computer for viruses and spyware to ensure there
are no harmful programs on your computer that could capture your
password.
While these precautions cannot completely guarantee the protection of
your Full Tilt Poker account and computer, they will improve your
account and computer security.
If you would like to change your account password to make it more
secure, just follow these four steps:
1) Log in to your Full Tilt Poker account.
2) Select "Account" from the top menu bar.
3) Select "Change Password".
4) Enter your current and new password and press "OK".
For other ways to protect you online at Full Tilt Poker, please visit:
http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/identityProtection.php
Thanks in advance for your cooperation. If you have any other questions,
please feel free to email us. We're always here to help.
Regards,
Sean H
Security and Fraud
Full Tilt Poker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please remember never to give out your password or enter
account details over the Internet. Full Tilt Poker staff will
never ask you for your password. For your security, always
keep this information a secret.
Learn, Chat, and Play with the Pros at Full Tilt Poker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "support@fulltiltpoker.com" <support@fulltiltpoker.com>
To: xxxxxx@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 5:52:21 AM
Subject: Important Information About Your Full Tilt Poker Account.
Please Read!
Dear member,
Full Tilt Poker Security teams have recently discovered that different
blacklisted I.P's have
tried logging in to your FullTilt Poker account and several Memorable
data and password
failure were present. For Security reasons we have reset your password.
To avoid fraudulent activites on your account please take a minute to
download and install
the newest Full Tilt Security update:
Click here to download the Full Tilt Poker Security Update (link was inserted here to a third-party Web address)
Failure to do so will cause problems with your FullTilt Poker account
and immediate account suspension.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter and we apologize for any
inconvenience this may cause.
Regards,
Bobby
Full Tilt Poker Security Team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please remember never to give out your password or enter
account details over the Internet. Full Tilt Poker staff will
never ask you for your password. For your security, always
keep this information a secret.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Poker Traffic and Short Stacks
Traffic Growth at Poker Sites.
---
I've always thought that there was no EV difference between playing a short stack and deep stack. But this post seems to argue that shortstack play results in higher winrates. I'm not sure if I believe it. There are some winning shortstack players, and playing a shortstack style has its merits.
Still, I don't believe there's an inherent advantage to playing a short stack instead of a deeper one. It's just different.
---
I've always thought that there was no EV difference between playing a short stack and deep stack. But this post seems to argue that shortstack play results in higher winrates. I'm not sure if I believe it. There are some winning shortstack players, and playing a shortstack style has its merits.
Still, I don't believe there's an inherent advantage to playing a short stack instead of a deeper one. It's just different.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Results Oriented
"Parcells believed that even in the NFL a lot of players were more concerned with seeming to want to win that with actually winning, and that many of them did not know the difference."
--"The Blind Side," by Michael Lewis
I set a goal, and I was going to stick to it.
I wanted to rebuild my Full Tilt bankroll from $3,000 to $10,000 before moving up in stakes on other sites where I keep most of my roll. There were several reasons for this challenge: I wanted to rejuvenate my Full Tilt account without making a deposit, experiment with new tactics at 2/4 and 3/6, and prove to myself that I could set a goal and reach it.
I planned to get there in three weeks.
I did well at first, slowly building up on Full Tilt until I got to $8,500. There was nothing spectacular about this run -- just steadily building up toward where I wanted to be. But then things started to go wrong.
I found the juiciest 50/100 shorthanded limit game I had ever seen, with a table average VP$IP of about 48 and a seat open next to a player who was seeing nearly every flop. I felt my overall bankroll could support sitting at this table, so I decided to take a shot.
First I put in a lot of bets with an underboat vs. an overboat. Then QQ got cracked. Then KK fell. Within a few minutes, I was down $4,500. Oh well, I told myself. I knew the risk going in.
When I woke up the next morning, I was determined to push hard toward my goal. Back at 2/4, I opened up my game with lots of 4-bets, steal attempts and efforts to push every little small edge I could perceive. I spewed chips at an alarming rate.
I tried to be the kind of loose-aggressive player who would get paid off because my holdings would be so unpredictable. Instead, I seemed to only get action when I didn't want it.
Down to about $1,500, I dug in. For the first time, I was worried about dropping to dangerously low levels. I played tight -- too tight. I played weak. In one hand against cmitch, I may have been able to take it down with a bet or check-raise on the turn when I made trips. Instead, I meekly called a bet and then paid off on the river when his flush got there.
I dropped down to .50/1 to build back up again. I told myself I could be like Chris Ferguson, and slowly get back to where I wanted to be one small step at a time.
After only two days of play, I lost patience. How could I waste this time playing .50/1 when I could be winning at 5/10 -- or even having a go at 10/20? What was I doing grinding out $2 and $4 pots when my yearly average is so much higher?
I was fully aware that these thoughts would only get me into trouble. The only two options were to stick with my plan for weeks or months of more frustration, or to take one more chance. I played a few topsy-turvy 2/4 heads-up matches, and my roll fell below $200 by the time I was through.
When I dropped this low, I realized what a fish I had been. But it also enabled me to accept failure. I try to treat poker like an investment. It was time to cut my losses.
I adopted a better plan: abandon my goal, transfer money to my Full Tilt account rather than try to rebuild on a short roll, play the limits I wanted to play and quit steaming over a useless challenge.
From the start, this effort was focused on trying to reach a number rather than improving my game. It had little to do with getting better or making smarter decisions.
I like to learn from my mistakes:
1) I never want to play on a site when I'm underrolled. It's too difficult to play my best game when I'm scared to take chances.
2) I should remember that pushing too hard is often counterproductive. I thought I had learned long ago that I can only play my best game for about 2 hours at a time, and the probability of losing money greatly increases when I try to extend sessions beyond that.
3) It's OK to experiment with new strategies and take shots, but I should only try one at a time.
I'm a lucky bastard. As soon as I abandoned my quest, I started winning again. I'm back to playing a style I'm comfortable with -- my style -- and I've won $3,500 in the last three hours at the tables. That's a rate I can be happy with.
--"The Blind Side," by Michael Lewis
I set a goal, and I was going to stick to it.
I wanted to rebuild my Full Tilt bankroll from $3,000 to $10,000 before moving up in stakes on other sites where I keep most of my roll. There were several reasons for this challenge: I wanted to rejuvenate my Full Tilt account without making a deposit, experiment with new tactics at 2/4 and 3/6, and prove to myself that I could set a goal and reach it.
I planned to get there in three weeks.
I did well at first, slowly building up on Full Tilt until I got to $8,500. There was nothing spectacular about this run -- just steadily building up toward where I wanted to be. But then things started to go wrong.
I found the juiciest 50/100 shorthanded limit game I had ever seen, with a table average VP$IP of about 48 and a seat open next to a player who was seeing nearly every flop. I felt my overall bankroll could support sitting at this table, so I decided to take a shot.
First I put in a lot of bets with an underboat vs. an overboat. Then QQ got cracked. Then KK fell. Within a few minutes, I was down $4,500. Oh well, I told myself. I knew the risk going in.
When I woke up the next morning, I was determined to push hard toward my goal. Back at 2/4, I opened up my game with lots of 4-bets, steal attempts and efforts to push every little small edge I could perceive. I spewed chips at an alarming rate.
I tried to be the kind of loose-aggressive player who would get paid off because my holdings would be so unpredictable. Instead, I seemed to only get action when I didn't want it.
Down to about $1,500, I dug in. For the first time, I was worried about dropping to dangerously low levels. I played tight -- too tight. I played weak. In one hand against cmitch, I may have been able to take it down with a bet or check-raise on the turn when I made trips. Instead, I meekly called a bet and then paid off on the river when his flush got there.
I dropped down to .50/1 to build back up again. I told myself I could be like Chris Ferguson, and slowly get back to where I wanted to be one small step at a time.
After only two days of play, I lost patience. How could I waste this time playing .50/1 when I could be winning at 5/10 -- or even having a go at 10/20? What was I doing grinding out $2 and $4 pots when my yearly average is so much higher?
I was fully aware that these thoughts would only get me into trouble. The only two options were to stick with my plan for weeks or months of more frustration, or to take one more chance. I played a few topsy-turvy 2/4 heads-up matches, and my roll fell below $200 by the time I was through.
When I dropped this low, I realized what a fish I had been. But it also enabled me to accept failure. I try to treat poker like an investment. It was time to cut my losses.
I adopted a better plan: abandon my goal, transfer money to my Full Tilt account rather than try to rebuild on a short roll, play the limits I wanted to play and quit steaming over a useless challenge.
From the start, this effort was focused on trying to reach a number rather than improving my game. It had little to do with getting better or making smarter decisions.
I like to learn from my mistakes:
1) I never want to play on a site when I'm underrolled. It's too difficult to play my best game when I'm scared to take chances.
2) I should remember that pushing too hard is often counterproductive. I thought I had learned long ago that I can only play my best game for about 2 hours at a time, and the probability of losing money greatly increases when I try to extend sessions beyond that.
3) It's OK to experiment with new strategies and take shots, but I should only try one at a time.
I'm a lucky bastard. As soon as I abandoned my quest, I started winning again. I'm back to playing a style I'm comfortable with -- my style -- and I've won $3,500 in the last three hours at the tables. That's a rate I can be happy with.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Damn Shortstacks
Ed Miller claims The Biggest No-Limit Myth is that "big stacks can 'bully' the table, and short stacks have to sit and take it."
He tries to make the point that "big stacks don’t hold any inherent advantage over small stacks," but I believe his conclusion that you should "go ahead and buy in for whatever you want to buy in for" is bad advice for many players.
There's a simple reason why I like to buy in as much as possible in a no limit game: it maximizes my winrate.
Because I have a skill advantage over my opposition, I want to be able to go all in and get paid off for the highest amount possible when I have the best hand. Sure, I could play as mathematically as well with a shortstack, but why would I want to do that when I could get be getting paid off bigger?
If I only have 50 BB in front of me, that means I can only win up to 50 BB of a big-stacked fish's money at a time. What's the sense in that when my goal is to bust the idiot calling station for all his money when I hold the nuts?
Most winning cash game players should buy in the highest amount they can to make the most of their edge. I can't understand why solid, well-bankrolled players would want to confine themselves to a shortstack strategy.
---
Here's a hand against a shortstacker I wanted to look at:
From the cutoff in a 5/10 game, I raised first in with QJs to $35. The BB, with only $200 in front of him, makes a mini-raise to $80, leaving him with $120 behind. This screams of a premium hand, either AA or KK.
But with $120 already in the pot, I called another $55 to see a flop. This may be a small leak on my part: the most I can win is $240, and I'm paying $55 more preflop with about a 19 percent chance of winning. This is bad because 55/240=23 percent > 19 percent.
I hate shortstacks. I just want to bust them. Fortunately, that's what I did. I bet $120 on an excellent flop to put the shortstack guy's AA all in:
I guess I should have folded preflop though if I trusted my read. But it's a closer call if I expand the shortstack's range of hands.
He tries to make the point that "big stacks don’t hold any inherent advantage over small stacks," but I believe his conclusion that you should "go ahead and buy in for whatever you want to buy in for" is bad advice for many players.
There's a simple reason why I like to buy in as much as possible in a no limit game: it maximizes my winrate.
Because I have a skill advantage over my opposition, I want to be able to go all in and get paid off for the highest amount possible when I have the best hand. Sure, I could play as mathematically as well with a shortstack, but why would I want to do that when I could get be getting paid off bigger?
If I only have 50 BB in front of me, that means I can only win up to 50 BB of a big-stacked fish's money at a time. What's the sense in that when my goal is to bust the idiot calling station for all his money when I hold the nuts?
Most winning cash game players should buy in the highest amount they can to make the most of their edge. I can't understand why solid, well-bankrolled players would want to confine themselves to a shortstack strategy.
---
Here's a hand against a shortstacker I wanted to look at:
From the cutoff in a 5/10 game, I raised first in with QJs to $35. The BB, with only $200 in front of him, makes a mini-raise to $80, leaving him with $120 behind. This screams of a premium hand, either AA or KK.
But with $120 already in the pot, I called another $55 to see a flop. This may be a small leak on my part: the most I can win is $240, and I'm paying $55 more preflop with about a 19 percent chance of winning. This is bad because 55/240=23 percent > 19 percent.
I hate shortstacks. I just want to bust them. Fortunately, that's what I did. I bet $120 on an excellent flop to put the shortstack guy's AA all in:
http://twodimes.net/h/?z=3829685The river brought a 9 to make my straight and it was all over for Mr. Too Scared To Buy In Full.
pokenum -h ah ad - qh jh -- jd 8h th
Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing Jd Th 8h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Ad Ah 458 46.26 523 52.83 9 0.91 0.467
Qh Jh 523 52.83 458 46.26 9 0.91 0.533
I guess I should have folded preflop though if I trusted my read. But it's a closer call if I expand the shortstack's range of hands.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Status report
"I don't believe in luck. It's all mathematics. Everybody runs the same. I believe in taking personal responsibility for my play. I see too many posts in which people say they run bad or are unlucky, and so on. I believe that you make your own results, and that everything comes down to your decisions. No one else is in control but yourself. People think that the cards have a role in the results, and they do in the short run, but in the long run, it'll all even out. If your results aren't good, it's most likely because you're not playing well."
--Brian Townsend, CardPlayer Magazine
I've been playing and running well for the last couple of months. I'm learning more and my reads are steadily getting better. This game is all incremental -- the path to victory comes one step at a time.
My career winnings are approaching $100,000, although it will take a bit longer before my bankroll gets to that point, probably not until next year. That's OK. I'll get my vacation before too long.
I'm closing in on being able to take another shot at the 10/20 games. I'll move up when I near 30 buy-ins for that game, which is tougher than 5/10.
There are so many people who are terrible at 5/10, and only a few who I respect. Those are the regulars who are very aggressive and still pull down a profit. Anyone can be a maniac, but that doesn't mean they'll make money.
I fell short of my goal of reaching a $100K bankroll by March, but that's just a small setback. In the big picture, I'm still on track toward the broader goal of moving up as high as my ability and bankroll allows. Even if I don't immediately succeed at 10/20 this time, I will next time. And then I'll repeat the process for the next limit.
Or perhaps I'll find a ceiling to my abilities and will have to be at peace with whatever limit I can beat.
That would be OK too, because I'm not going anywhere. I'll never let myself go busto. I might whine about bad beats sometimes, but those are temporary. I'll still be playing.
---
Here's a hand of the day. The table chat got pretty lively afterward. My opponent said I made a "donkey call," and I told him it was easy to call such a donkey bluff. My read was that this opponent would fire two bullets at any large pot, and I figured I was ahead as long as a scare card didn't fall. Both the turn and river were safe cards, so I had to call down.
5/10
4 calls
Hero raises to $70 from the button with Kc Td
Two calls
Pot is $245
*** Dealing Flop *** [ 9s, 8d, Ts ]
3 checks
*** Dealing Turn *** [ 9d ]
MP checks.
Villain bets $170
Hero calls $170
MP folds.
*** Dealing River *** [ 5c ]
Villain bets $380
Hero calls $380
Villain shows Js, Ad for a pair of Nines.
Hero shows Kc, Td for two pair, Tens and Nines.
Hero wins $1,342
--Brian Townsend, CardPlayer Magazine
I've been playing and running well for the last couple of months. I'm learning more and my reads are steadily getting better. This game is all incremental -- the path to victory comes one step at a time.
My career winnings are approaching $100,000, although it will take a bit longer before my bankroll gets to that point, probably not until next year. That's OK. I'll get my vacation before too long.
I'm closing in on being able to take another shot at the 10/20 games. I'll move up when I near 30 buy-ins for that game, which is tougher than 5/10.
There are so many people who are terrible at 5/10, and only a few who I respect. Those are the regulars who are very aggressive and still pull down a profit. Anyone can be a maniac, but that doesn't mean they'll make money.
I fell short of my goal of reaching a $100K bankroll by March, but that's just a small setback. In the big picture, I'm still on track toward the broader goal of moving up as high as my ability and bankroll allows. Even if I don't immediately succeed at 10/20 this time, I will next time. And then I'll repeat the process for the next limit.
Or perhaps I'll find a ceiling to my abilities and will have to be at peace with whatever limit I can beat.
That would be OK too, because I'm not going anywhere. I'll never let myself go busto. I might whine about bad beats sometimes, but those are temporary. I'll still be playing.
---
Here's a hand of the day. The table chat got pretty lively afterward. My opponent said I made a "donkey call," and I told him it was easy to call such a donkey bluff. My read was that this opponent would fire two bullets at any large pot, and I figured I was ahead as long as a scare card didn't fall. Both the turn and river were safe cards, so I had to call down.
5/10
4 calls
Hero raises to $70 from the button with Kc Td
Two calls
Pot is $245
*** Dealing Flop *** [ 9s, 8d, Ts ]
3 checks
*** Dealing Turn *** [ 9d ]
MP checks.
Villain bets $170
Hero calls $170
MP folds.
*** Dealing River *** [ 5c ]
Villain bets $380
Hero calls $380
Villain shows Js, Ad for a pair of Nines.
Hero shows Kc, Td for two pair, Tens and Nines.
Hero wins $1,342
Thursday, September 13, 2007
We are not fish
Many losing poker players can choose not to be fish. They could decide to win, if they had the motivation to work at it. There's an incredible amount of dead money in the poker world, and I have several friends who could get a piece of it if they would listen and learn.
Poker is a game of skill in the long run, and good players will always win over a significant enough stretch of hands. There are many simple ways to become a winner. The problem most players have is that they're unwilling to take the steps necessary to guarantee victory. Of course, some people just don't "get it," but I believe most people with average or better intelligence have the capability to do what it takes.
I know a few players who simply refuse to do what it takes to win. Here are their biggest failings:
They won't learn how to play a tight-aggressive style, which I've found to be profitable even in shorthanded games. Sure, a loose-aggressive style may be more profitable for strong players, but TAG players make money because they don't put their money in without a quality hand, and they don't call bets unless they think they're going to win.
Perhaps the biggest leak losers have is that they won't play limits appropriate to their bankroll. If they would follow Chris Ferguson's bankroll requirements, they would have a much better chance of minimizing losses while slowly building up their savings.
The third common failing of bad players is that they lack discipline. They won't read books, blogs and magazines. They won't watch videos. They won't read 2+2. They won't learn from their losing hands. They won't use PokerTracker and PokerAce. They won't stop playing when they're tired or take a break during a losing streak. They can't stop chasing losses when behind or be satisfied with a small win when ahead.
This is pretty straightforward stuff, and I'm sure most people reading this know these basics already. But the vast majority of poker players are career losers, and I hope one or two of them will wake up and realize it doesn't have to be this way.
Poker is a game of skill in the long run, and good players will always win over a significant enough stretch of hands. There are many simple ways to become a winner. The problem most players have is that they're unwilling to take the steps necessary to guarantee victory. Of course, some people just don't "get it," but I believe most people with average or better intelligence have the capability to do what it takes.
I know a few players who simply refuse to do what it takes to win. Here are their biggest failings:
They won't learn how to play a tight-aggressive style, which I've found to be profitable even in shorthanded games. Sure, a loose-aggressive style may be more profitable for strong players, but TAG players make money because they don't put their money in without a quality hand, and they don't call bets unless they think they're going to win.
Perhaps the biggest leak losers have is that they won't play limits appropriate to their bankroll. If they would follow Chris Ferguson's bankroll requirements, they would have a much better chance of minimizing losses while slowly building up their savings.
The third common failing of bad players is that they lack discipline. They won't read books, blogs and magazines. They won't watch videos. They won't read 2+2. They won't learn from their losing hands. They won't use PokerTracker and PokerAce. They won't stop playing when they're tired or take a break during a losing streak. They can't stop chasing losses when behind or be satisfied with a small win when ahead.
This is pretty straightforward stuff, and I'm sure most people reading this know these basics already. But the vast majority of poker players are career losers, and I hope one or two of them will wake up and realize it doesn't have to be this way.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Bonus Trap
Well, crap.
I went busto on Full Tilt, leaving my total remaining bankroll a shade over $30,000. Sure there were bad beats, but it was ultimately my fault for losing there.
Long story short: My Full Tilt account reached a high of about $45,000 sometime around January, but then I withdrew $25,000 in spring, mostly to pay taxes. Various losses,transfers and backing deals brought my Full Tilt roll down to $3,600 before this week's bonus. Then I started playing the bonus at 5/10 and quickly lost 2 buy-ins, then played 2/4 until it was gone.
Now, this isn't a major disaster or anything because I'm still healthy at other sites. But it is stupid and embarrassing to have gone all the way to $0 on a site. If I were to do things over again, I wouldn't have played higher than 2/4 on my limited roll, and I would have stopped before my account got too small to have a good chance of coming back.
There are lots of reasons for losing on Full Tilt, including a bonus-chasing mentality that gave hands played a higher priority than money won. I love bonuses, but that's just dumb.
Another problem was that I didn't leave myself with enough money on Full Tilt to play the limits I wanted to, and I was unwilling to drop below 2/4.
On the other hand, I knew that there was a chance I would lose by playing with relatively little money in my account, and I'm not overly pissed off that that possibility came to pass. Shit happens, and I was aware of the risk going in.
I'm left feeling the same way about my game that I did around this time last year -- I know everything I need to know to win, and it's just a matter of execution to make it happen.
I should be careful when playing bonuses. I can make big folds. I can be at peace with unsuccessful bluffs. I should quit playing if I'm not thinking clearly. I can slow down. I can handle the downswings.
I know the right plays at the right times, and there's no reason to feel lost at the table unless there's something wrong with my mindset.
It's all the same old shit. Poker players are at war with themselves to play their best games and do what they know is right. So do it.
I went busto on Full Tilt, leaving my total remaining bankroll a shade over $30,000. Sure there were bad beats, but it was ultimately my fault for losing there.
Long story short: My Full Tilt account reached a high of about $45,000 sometime around January, but then I withdrew $25,000 in spring, mostly to pay taxes. Various losses,transfers and backing deals brought my Full Tilt roll down to $3,600 before this week's bonus. Then I started playing the bonus at 5/10 and quickly lost 2 buy-ins, then played 2/4 until it was gone.
Now, this isn't a major disaster or anything because I'm still healthy at other sites. But it is stupid and embarrassing to have gone all the way to $0 on a site. If I were to do things over again, I wouldn't have played higher than 2/4 on my limited roll, and I would have stopped before my account got too small to have a good chance of coming back.
There are lots of reasons for losing on Full Tilt, including a bonus-chasing mentality that gave hands played a higher priority than money won. I love bonuses, but that's just dumb.
Another problem was that I didn't leave myself with enough money on Full Tilt to play the limits I wanted to, and I was unwilling to drop below 2/4.
On the other hand, I knew that there was a chance I would lose by playing with relatively little money in my account, and I'm not overly pissed off that that possibility came to pass. Shit happens, and I was aware of the risk going in.
I'm left feeling the same way about my game that I did around this time last year -- I know everything I need to know to win, and it's just a matter of execution to make it happen.
I should be careful when playing bonuses. I can make big folds. I can be at peace with unsuccessful bluffs. I should quit playing if I'm not thinking clearly. I can slow down. I can handle the downswings.
I know the right plays at the right times, and there's no reason to feel lost at the table unless there's something wrong with my mindset.
It's all the same old shit. Poker players are at war with themselves to play their best games and do what they know is right. So do it.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Use your credit card to play online poker
It's quick. It's easy. It works.
U.S. poker players can deposit money into Full Tilt Poker, PokerStars and Bodog accounts using your Visa or MasterCard. This isn't new exactly, but it seems like many people may not know about it.
I deposited to Full Tilt using my MasterCard for the first time today so that I could be credited with my $500 deposit bonus. I had to e-mail Full Tilt a few times before they would increase my deposit limit from $600 to $1,000 so I could take full advantage of the 50 percent bonus, but once they did, the process was super easy.
I clicked on the MasterCard option. I typed in my credit card number and three-digit security number. I waited 20 seconds for the transaction to be approved. And then the money was there.
A lot of people may have stopped playing poker or busted out after Neteller left the U.S. market. With few ways to get money back in to the poker sites, the games seemed like they got tougher.
Now, some of the players who didn't play because they didn't have an easy way to get money into their accounts will hopefully come back to the tables. By using a credit card, you don't even need to set up a third-party account through ePassporte or Click2Pay, which can take days or weeks to verify.
It's kind of funny how Full Tilt seems to have gotten around banks' inhibitions about being used to fund gambling sites. The transactions are processed through outside businesses that are not related to gambling. In my case, after I made my deposit, I received an e-mail from Full Tilt that said my deposit would show up on my credit card bill as a transaction with a video game Web site. Whatevers.
It should also be said that some credit cards may not process the transactions, but I know a few people now who have deposited without any difficulties at all. In some cases, even credit cards that didn't work in the past are successfully processing transactions now.
When it comes time to withdraw money from online poker sites, I've been requesting paper checks through the mail. I've done this several times with no problems.
So whip out your credit card and play some pokah!
U.S. poker players can deposit money into Full Tilt Poker, PokerStars and Bodog accounts using your Visa or MasterCard. This isn't new exactly, but it seems like many people may not know about it.
I deposited to Full Tilt using my MasterCard for the first time today so that I could be credited with my $500 deposit bonus. I had to e-mail Full Tilt a few times before they would increase my deposit limit from $600 to $1,000 so I could take full advantage of the 50 percent bonus, but once they did, the process was super easy.
I clicked on the MasterCard option. I typed in my credit card number and three-digit security number. I waited 20 seconds for the transaction to be approved. And then the money was there.
A lot of people may have stopped playing poker or busted out after Neteller left the U.S. market. With few ways to get money back in to the poker sites, the games seemed like they got tougher.
Now, some of the players who didn't play because they didn't have an easy way to get money into their accounts will hopefully come back to the tables. By using a credit card, you don't even need to set up a third-party account through ePassporte or Click2Pay, which can take days or weeks to verify.
It's kind of funny how Full Tilt seems to have gotten around banks' inhibitions about being used to fund gambling sites. The transactions are processed through outside businesses that are not related to gambling. In my case, after I made my deposit, I received an e-mail from Full Tilt that said my deposit would show up on my credit card bill as a transaction with a video game Web site. Whatevers.
It should also be said that some credit cards may not process the transactions, but I know a few people now who have deposited without any difficulties at all. In some cases, even credit cards that didn't work in the past are successfully processing transactions now.
When it comes time to withdraw money from online poker sites, I've been requesting paper checks through the mail. I've done this several times with no problems.
So whip out your credit card and play some pokah!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
